Is FCPS getting rid of AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

There are plenty of posters, including on this thread, who will tell you that it's the same. They have chosen the cluster model rather than the center school, so they are speaking from that knowledge, rather than experience with the center school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

I am PP and our school does not do the cluster model. All Level 4 students are placed in a homeroom and other high achieving students are then placed in the room to fill out the class. I think it all depends on population. My school has too large of a SPED and ESOL population for AAP curriculum to be given to all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

I am PP and our school does not do the cluster model. All Level 4 students are placed in a homeroom and other high achieving students are then placed in the room to fill out the class. I think it all depends on population. My school has too large of a SPED and ESOL population for AAP curriculum to be given to all.

You don't know anything about the AAP curriculum. There are a lot of schools that do the AAP curriculum for all students and the differentiator between general ed and LLIV is just advanced math. Including my school which is 30% FARMS/ESOL, now go on....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

There are plenty of posters, including on this thread, who will tell you that it's the same. They have chosen the cluster model rather than the center school, so they are speaking from that knowledge, rather than experience with the center school.

If a family is happy with the education their child is getting, there's no need for you to come on here and be an as$hat about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

I don't know, but I'm happy for my child to be in a diverse classroom at our diverse school instead of the white and asian UMC distribution of our local Center. Your Center may be different, but the diversity was one reason we moved to this region and we didn't want to switch our kid's school and get away from that. There is more to learning than "deep, guided instruction", which btw is not really what your kid is getting in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

You are right to be suspicious. The cluster model can work if most of the kids in the class are on or above grade level. If not, it's usually a "cluster" in a different sense of the word. I don't think there's ever been a parent on this board who has had a kid at a center and a kid at a low rated base school who has done the cluster model and thought the level of instruction was similar, especially if the base school doesn't offer Advanced Math until 5th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

AAP teacher here and agree. If a child is reading below grade level they will struggle with AAP SS/Science. They are probably not getting Full AAP. Our school is a LL4 and we try to incorporate a few AAP materials in the GenEd classrooms per quarter but they are not doing the full curriculum because we have many kids struggling with the normal curriculum. My class is Level 4 and Level 3 students.

For schools that do the cluster model (with below L3 included), are the LIV students actually getting the same level of deep, guided instruction that Center LIV are getting? We are at a (non-UMC) LLIV school and I'm not convinced that the Cluster model provides the same level of rigor that those at our (well-regarded) Center school does.

My ES (out of state) did a pseudo-cluster model for advanced math and reading/spelling and a lot of it was "fend for yourself and figure it out" that left a bitter taste in my mouth that took many years of fantastic teachers to undo.

I am PP and our school does not do the cluster model. All Level 4 students are placed in a homeroom and other high achieving students are then placed in the room to fill out the class. I think it all depends on population. My school has too large of a SPED and ESOL population for AAP curriculum to be given to all.

You don't know anything about the AAP curriculum. There are a lot of schools that do the AAP curriculum for all students and the differentiator between general ed and LLIV is just advanced math. Including my school which is 30% FARMS/ESOL, now go on....

I am PP and an AAP teacher at a LL4. I actually do know the Level 4 curriculum. I would love to know what your kids are doing in all subject areas that is AAP for all and I will gladly share if they are in fact getting the full AAP curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It'll never happen, but they really need to pair up the solid middle-of-the-road kids w/AAP kids rather than leaving those kids "behind" with the slower kids.

That’s what they said about TJ, and look at us now. Record number of people leaving FCPS because of these racist school board members. Goodbye Fairfax County, i’ll never forget the good ol’ golden days of this county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

[Anonymous]

I’m glad I read this thread. I had a lot of questions regarding what the heck was happening in my kids’ classrooms that didn’t happen in mine. They felt so broken and disjointed. I feel like I learned a lot here. The range of abilities in each classroom seems extraordinary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It'll never happen, but they really need to pair up the solid middle-of-the-road kids w/AAP kids rather than leaving those kids "behind" with the slower kids.

That’s what they said about TJ, and look at us now. Record number of people leaving FCPS because of these racist school board members. Goodbye Fairfax County, i’ll never forget the good ol’ golden days of this county.

OMG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

I'm so tired of you and your reading group story in every. single. thread about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

Why not? Get _all_ kids appropriate-level support for where they're at to help them maximize their potential/performance, regardless of whether they're ahead, behind, or on-grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The program is not the problem. What they do with the middle level kids is the issue. They are not being well served by pretending that teaching them on the same level as the slowest learners works. The way to improve thing is not to tear down a program working well for many kids but rather to fix the parts of the system NOT working well. Gen Ed is what is NOT working for many MC kids.

Crappy gen Ed is the natural result of pulling out the top 20% of students out of the program.

Yes, if they'd stop segregating kids and offer opportunities at all schools none of this would be necessary.

No. That’s just not correct. At least not at all schools. Like many on this board, my now AAP kids were in the highest reading group. That meant they virtually never met with the teacher. Eliminating AAP would just prolong the experience of K-2 of the faster kids being left far too much to their own devices while the teacher works with the slower kids. We need to move back toward grouping kids for instruction at the whole class level (review quarterly maybe so kids do not get stuck) vs this fairy tale fantasy they can teach all levels in a room of 20-30 kids.

And one teacher would do that in every classroom? Or we'd pull mythical bonus teachers to address each unique need in a single classroom, in the midst of a national teacher shortage?
So you're making a case for segregation? They used to teach all kids in the same classroom with more than 30 kids. It's nonsense to suggest this isn't possible.

They used to segregate kids who had learning disabilities and behavior issues into remedial classes. When you remove the kids who are struggling, it is easier to teach the other kids. The kids in the remedial classes learned little to nothing and were not expected to graduate from high school. They just disappeared from the classroom.

Now, kids with learning issues and behavior issues are expected to be mainstreamed with Teachers and specialists providing support. For kids with mild to moderate issues, mainstreaming works fine, the kids are likely on grade level and might be struggling a bit but not much. Kids with more serious issues fall behind but continue to be mainstreamed. Those kids take up more of the Teachers time because the teacher needs to try and get all kids on grade level. This means less time for the kids who are doing fine but need support to do fine. Those kids start to slide because they are not getting the attention that they need and now the Teacher is trying to teach kids who are behind and the kids who are falling behind and there is less time for the kids on grade level and no time for the ids who are ahead.

The approach to education has changes but not properly supported by the Federal Government, who passed the legislation that essentially stopped tracking. The legislation isn't bad, it is BS that remedial classes were wastelands that taught kids with learning issues and some behavior issues nothing. We legitimately need to do more to provide support and opportunities to kids who are struggling in school for whatever reason. But the lack of funds to provide the necessary supports means that still not enough is being done to support the kids who need the support AND the regular classroom has ended up being harmed because too much is being asked of Teachers.

Tracking does not have to be as problematic as it used to be but the way that the law works today makes it hard to develop a tracking program that meets the federal legislation criteria. So parents of kids who are on grade level and parents of kids who are ahead are increasingly frustrated because the current system is now failing everyone because god knows that it is not really helping kids with learning issues or behavior issues.

But AAP IS tracking. Why isn't anyone complaining about that. They're doing the same thing except for the smart kids and the ones whose parents bought their way in to AAP. Why isn't that now illegal?

It's not illegal because Virginia has a law ensuring that the state must provide educational services for gifted kids. My son met with his 1sg grade teacher twice in 3 months for reading groups because she had to "focus where the need is" on the kids who were behind. He wasn't even in the top reading group! He was in the #2 group.

He got barely any direct instruction because 2/3 of the class needed so much of her time, with half of them getting DAILY reading group with the teacher, while he met with her every 6 wks. That is why we have AAP.

In 2nd grade, 21 of 24 kids at a mid/upper SES school failed a math unit while the other 3 got 100% on the final test. The teacher had to repeat the unit for the 21 kids, while the 3 who aced it the first time played video games on a school computers.

If you think there's another way to meet the needs of these kids, consider the alternative, a DAP program maybe? Delayed academic progress? Imagine how parents would feel if they learned FCPS went the other way and decided to clump low performers. Would never fly.

Why not? Get _all_ kids appropriate-level support for where they're at to help them maximize their potential/performance, regardless of whether they're ahead, behind, or on-grade.